Apologies if it is gauche for a student to post in the parents’ forum.
I’ve been lurking for a while and have seen a lot of mentions of “average excellent students” or equivalent terminology (“my daughter, your average excellent student, was rejected from the three Ivies she applied to but is very happy at Carlton…”). The gist of the expression is clear, but I don’t really understand what characteristics it’s meant to bring to mind. As a teenager myself, I feel like I don’t have the bird’s-eye view necessary to see my age group as a whole and contemplate who represents the ‘average’ of however many of us are ‘excellent’.
What’s the difference to you, as parents, between a kid who is ‘average excellent’ versus one who is ‘truly excellent’?
“Average excellent” kids are truly excellent. It’s just that, because there are only a limited number of slots at Ivies/equivalents for such a big country and a lot of the world wants to get in to them as well and a big percentage of the slots are already spoken for for hooked applicants, being truly excellent in everything (top 1 percentile, for instance) usually isn’t enough for unhooked applicants. They’d usually have to stand out in one or several ways as well.
Top end in academic credentials, but no special relationships (e.g. to big donors, major politicians, or celebrities) or achievements or talents that get state or national level recognition or award.
Yes, excellent, but there are many others with credentials just as impressive. Not a standout among the top students even though they may be far above their HS peers.
Consider this. There is a range of giftedness, some are low, others mid and fewer high end gifted. Think of that infamous Bell curve. All fall to the right but some more so than others - a decreasing number the higher the IQ. Likewise a student can be well to the right on that curve and have great stats and EC’s but so do many. There are very few that are ahead of even the top pack.
I didn’t even address the concept of having other advantages that make a student stand out.
People get sorted out into many subgroups. The average college student is above the average population. The average grad/post bachelors professional student is above the average college student. Then there are the very few among the academicians who are noted in their fields. All is relative.
For you it means that even though you/someone else may have excellent credentials there are so many that getting into the school of choice may not happen- too many well qualified students for the number of places at any one college.
I’d say 3.85+ GPA 1560+ SAT, president of a few clubs, raised money for underprivileged (fill in the blank) played a sport but not at a level to be recruited, played violin or piano for 12 years, did research, but no Intel or Siemens. Assorted awards at school, or local level. Basically, great kid, great student, but no standout achievements. The differentiating point where truly excellent starts from the perspective of AO’s is all of the above plus notable achievements on a broader scale that demonstrate passionate commitment to an interest
@Lindagaf coined the term and it’s one that describes a lot of the students I know, including my daughter. I think it is as likely to be related to psychographic characteristics as it is to be tied to a particular range of test scores or grades. This is my interpretation of the term (obviously colored largely by my own experience as an “average excellent” student myself and as the mother and friend of many others):
Bright but not brilliant. Talented but not gifted. Someone who catches on to things quickly, can express themselves well, but thinks in a way that reflects a typical rather than atypical brain.
Hardworking but not necessarily driven. Someone who does what’s required, in fact does more than what’s required in most classes. But who doesn’t go home and continue working late into the night just because they want to master something that’s not required.
Conventional rather than eccentric. Most of the “average excellent” students I know tend to be rule followers rather than rule breakers. The kind of kids who get through four years of high school with no detentions; when they’re called to the principal’s office, they don’t get nervous.
Generalists rather than specialists. The “average excellent” students I know are good at lots of things. They’re the ones that are taking advanced courses in math and language, social sciences and physical sciences. Well-rounded students with ECs that sometimes don’t point in any particular direction.
Likeable rather than challenging. They’re wonderful to be around—often clever, pleasant, and interesting. Kids who are well-liked by teachers and peers. Good girls who edit the yearbook and agreeable boys who captain the debate team. Not necessarily “popular,” but usually nice.
Cooperative rather than cut-throat competitive when dealing with others. They work well in groups, although they may do more than their share to make sure that a project gets a good grade or a performance comes off without a hitch. They may be secretly competitive, but they don’t crow about their achievements or aggressively push to always be the best.
Self-effacing rather than overly confident. While these kids are usually very smart, they may have a tendency to question themselves and, at times, under-estimate themselves.
Don’t get me wrong—“average excellent” kids are often superior, top-of-the-class in many ways. The “average excellent” kid can have astronomically high stats and grades or more mediocre ones. I would consider a student with, say, 34ACT, 3.9w/4.9uw, 12 APs with 4&5s to be “average excellent” if she fits the criteria above. They are kids who, in my day, filled the graduating classes of the Ivy League and other elite schools. The issue is that in this hyper-competitive college-admissions environment, they are the ones who are likely to be overlooked.
I think of the term representing the top 5-10% of students in terms of class standing and testing that don’t have exceptionally compelling hooks for their top pick school. The term is important since we’re talking about ~175,000 to 350,000 students annually, and for students of this caliber the competition for “elite” schools and merit scholarships is particularly intense and frustrating. They have the intelligence and discipline to succeed at any university in the country but are constrained by the limited number of seats at their target schools.
I think this leads to a lot of speculation on the CC boards and in other forums as to what these kids can do to stand out. For example, comments that I’ve seen on the GT and UF acceptance thread seem to contradict #4 on @EllieMom post above. It seemed to me that a lot of students that I would consider “one-trick ponies” were rejected from these schools despite extremely high GPA/SAT/ACT score. Their ECs were focused on robotics or other STEM based interests and they were applying for CS or Engineering. On the other hand, students with lower standardized test scores but “generalized” ECs outside of their desired major were accepted. It makes me wonder if its easier to stand out as a CS applicant with 4+ years of dance and art compared to 1000’s of CS applicants that have competed in Science Olympiads.
CS and engineering majors at many more selective schools (commonly at the popular state flagship level) are more popular than the departmental capacities, so admission to them may be more selective than for the school overall.
@ucbalumnus That’s very true, and it certainly ups the ante for our “average excellent” students. However, I still think that schools tend to prefer students that show a broad range of interests over students that are “specialized” in a single discipline.
@shortnuke Yes and no. Lets assume at this point we’re talking about very selective universities that use holistic admissions. It’s important that students have EC’s as well as strong overall academics, but at the most selective schools (what? 20% or less acceptance rates?), they are also looking for “spikey” students. Students that excel in one or two areas, over their peers. A differentiator.
That “spike” is why one “average excellent” student got accepted at a very selective school over another.
They’re the ones who are excellent within the context of their school, but nobody in another high school or out of state is going to be talking about how outstanding they are. They may be at or near the top of their class, but they’re not notably better than the top of previous classes.
Thanks for the shout-out @EllieMom . I wrote this last April, after my college experience with my daughter, who is the poster child for the “average” excellent student:-)
As far as being exceptional, it’s pretty obvious when a kid is exceptional. And usually, the exceptional kids are doing things off their own backs and doing them well before high school.
@Muchtolearn , I dsagree with your scores for the ACT. My daughters score on the old SAT translates to about 1540 on the new one. Thes average excellent students ARE excellent students. It’s the “average” bit that that’s the adjective here:-)
@Much2learn Maybe I am off base, but I think most here are speaking of kids with stats at the tippy top tier, not 30 to 32 ACT. Think 34+, with perfect or near perfect GPAs and class rank. But as others have said, no compelling “and” or hook that sets them apart from others in that group.
To me, average excellent students stand out vividly within the context of their HS. They are the rock stars. Then they apply to college… and they mix right in with the crowd. There is no longer a “wow” factor. They no longer stand out and don’t get accepted to some/many of the schools that they had hoped for. They may, of course, get in … but not like what they anticipated.
Take it down a little and these kids get accepted to plenty of great schools.
Average excellent students have SAT/ACT/AP scores in the top 1%, they have taken the most rigorous curriculum available at their HS and they have an impressive list of ECs engaging in their school and living communities.
However, these may not all apply:
Understand material immediately and with the depth to be able to teach as they are learning.
Instinctively combine subjects creating links to real world problems.
Have deep critical thinking skills and a memory that works like a read/write/retrieval process.
Retain information so reteaching after a significant time period is never required.
Incredible organizational skills requiring less study time and more time for research, fun, extra coursework.
The fearless ability to enter new situations, interact and lead among many different age groups/intellect levels.
Passion for learning!! Are not happy without intellectual stimulation. K-8 was trying for many of these students.
Needed to reach past what HS offered, so they have obviously not reached their potential.
Often parenting (on an intellectual level) is somewhat like having a peer before your son or daughter is a teen.
@Gator88NE For the average excellent type students that we’re talking about, the ECs aren’t leading to patents, published articles, national awards, etc. Students achieving this type of notoriety probably wouldn’t be considered average excellent.
Therefore, the “spikey” average excellent students really don’t stand out much in the pool of applicants. Sure, an school will accept a lot of students with STEM-oriented ECs for their engineering programs, but from what I’ve seen on the acceptance threads many schools seem to be very interested in students whose ECs go beyond the boundaries of the major.
Most parents of average-excellent students are never personally exposed to the truly gifted. Once you are, then you understand the difference. The son of my carpool partner has his HS counselor very excited because for the first time in his long counseling career, he gets to check the box “One of the best ever” on the report he sends to colleges. Exceptional is like pornography, you know it when you see it.
@KLSD , you are describing gifted kids. Plenty of gifted kids do and don’t get into top colleges. Average excellent kids may or may not be gifted. As I posted in my original thread, our HS Val was gifted, but denied at all Ivies and Tufts. She attends a top ten LAC. The kid who got into Harvard last year was not academically gifted, but he was exceptional, in that he pursued his interests with true devotion, for lack of a better word. He also was a very good, but not exceptional student. I guarantee he had the best recommendations though, because he was universally well-liked. He had his finger in many pies, but he truly loved all of them.